What is a META- Game?

[Revdyer]

I enjoyed the games, MoonBlade, and hope I expanded your meta-game just a bit. <smile>

[MoonBlade]

Yes very much so, Thanks. I have a much better army now and some ideas were to go with expansion. I still have 10 points left in my tournament army and since I know what you are bringing I can come prepaired to beat at least one person

[webhead817]

In an overly simple example, army X is doing very well in tournament play, but has a fatal flaw that can be exploited by army B. Now, army B might not play very well against the field, or even be that strong intriniscally, but if it is the best weapon to battle army X, it's often the correct play to use army B. In a sense you are playing a game layered on top of the tournament of "guess what army will be played the most and then play one that has a good chance of beating it."

Metagaming as an effect becomes more powerful as the field becomes better defined. For example, at the outset, armies A, B, C, X, Y, and Z all are played in fairly equal numbers. Over time, X proves to have the best game against Y, Z, A, and C, and B proves weak against the same...so X is played more and more in response. So, in an equal field of all six armies, B will lose much more often than it will win. But when the metagame skews towards X, with X played more than any other army, B grows stronger as a result.

[MalignantT]

I really wish it was easier to get in greek symbols on this silly thing, just for webhead's post above.

When I think meta-game, I tend to think about the dominant types of armies, and do my best to make something that will counter it. The problem for me is trying to find an army that does it all. Some armies are "beautiful" in their simplicity ('Trons, Kato/Ashigaru, Knights, Steamroller, Q9). Others are excellent in their versatility (upfront tanks with Krav as back up). Some have a job that they do particularly well (Minions, Rats). Others can be very powerful if played correctly, with a little luck on the initiative die, or hot d20 rolls (Frenzy, Blind Fury, Ullar Enhanced Rifle [no really, I must have a hot d20, that ability should not statistically work as well as it has been]).

But beyond the playing, there is the anticipation of what your opponents will do, or luring your opponents in to what you want them to do.


For me, this is the "game within the game", and depending on how you choose your armies (whether they are pre-made armies you both bring to the table, or if you go through the drafting process) and the lay-out of the terrain... you use your opponents' strategies and strengths against them.

Maybe it's a little too Sun-Zi for this application (Sun-Tzu for all the traditional spelling aficionados), but that's how I look at Meta-Game.


Say your opponent has a mobile army... let him overextend.

Say they have a key figure(s) that brings the army together (like a bonding squad) or a cheerleader that makes them an unstoppable force... take out that unit, or make it less attractive for them to use.


Or use your apparent strengths or weaknesses as a lure for the master plan...

Have Charos/Zelrig do heavy early damage as a paralyzer, but sacrifice him for what's really a good clean up unit to finish off your opponent.

Swarm with blade-gruts, expecting them to get cut down, letting your opponent get cocky at his apparent success, but slowly move up your heavy-gruts and orc champions for the real damage (chomp chomp, poke poke, 2/3 chance for skulls).




I guess meta-game also falls into the "mental game"... plans within plans kind of things.

It's not enough to just get lucky with your dice rolls, or have one tank just rip through your opponent... it's about setting up the situation where your opponent has no good options but the ones you have left for him... and for your opponent, those options are no good at all.